Episcopacy in the Diocese of Chelmsford: A new Bishop of Bradwell November 2017 DRAFT Contents 1. Introduction 3 2. A Vision for the Diocese of Chelmsford 6 3. Overview of the Diocese of Chelmsford 8 4. The Episcopal Areas and Archdeaconries 9 5. Role description and Person Specification 10 6. The Bradwell Episcopal Area 13 7. Working together 19 Appendix: The diocese and its people 20 1. Introduction What sort of episcopal oversight, leadership and ministry do we need in the diocese of Chelmsford? Since 1984 the answer to this question was the area system. That is, a system of oversight and governance, whereby the diocese was organised into three areas, with virtually all episcopal responsibilities delegated to the Area Bishop. This in turn leaves the diocesan free for strategic oversight within the diocese and for national responsibilities. The diocese of Chelmsford is what you might call, a small province rather than a big diocese. However, for about the same amount of time there has also been a recognition that this model wasn’t working as well as it might. The sheer size of the diocese has always stretched our leadership structures and resources. In 1989 a decision was made to create a fourth episcopal area, but this was never implemented beyond creating a new archdeaconry of Harlow in 1993. The question was raised several times and particularly by Bishop John Gladwin. Stephen Cottrell was enthroned as the tenth Bishop of Chelmsford in November 2010. He was appointed with a clear brief to help the Church in Essex and East London become more intentionally missional and evangelistic in all its ministry. On the one hand there was an expectation that he would give more time to the diocese, and on the other there were all sorts of reasons, not least the national priority for reimagining ministry, which meant leadership structures needed to be looked at if a mission agenda was actually going to be implemented at the local level. Some of these discussions quickly began to cohere around the question of the fourth episcopal area. There was a general acknowledgement that in a large diocese like Chelmsford there are fewer senior staff (Bishops and Archdeacons) to go round the clergy and parishes we serve. Indeed, dioceses smaller than one of our episcopal areas would often have twice the staffing at this level. Consequently, in 2011 a Leadership Review Group was set up to examine what leadership structure might best serve the diocese. The watchword of this group was ‘to close the gap’, that is to bring effective leadership closer to clergy and parishes. Following the report of this group, Transforming Leadership, a decision was made to create three new archdeaconries, one in each Episcopal Area. A period of consultation followed, and the three new archdeaconries came into being on 1 February 2013. This is about more than just boundaries: we have reimagined the role of Archdeacons, understanding them to be ‘leaders and enablers of mission and organisational change’ alongside their current, juridical and administrative roles. Our paper Transforming Leadership offers a new paradigm for the role of Archdeacon identifying the need for senior leadership in the Diocese to be closer to the ground and more hands on in supporting the period of significant change in parishes and deaneries implied by Transforming Presence.1 The remit is executive and missional leadership; it implies a sharing of episcopacy. 1 Transforming Presence is the name given to our Vision document and our four priorities for the diocese, namely 1) Inhabiting the world distinctively; 2) Evangelising Effectively; 3) Serving with accountability; and 4) Reimagining Ministry; further described in the next section. This strengthening of leadership will in turn help us realise our plans in Reimagining Ministry 2 where we imagine a new paradigm for parochially based ministry drawing on the ministry of all, challenging to focus on mission, and calling for a more collaborative working for both congregations and clergy. But with the creation of the new archdeaconries it was always known that there would be further issues to address. One of these is the nature of episcopal leadership in the diocese. By creating a leadership structure which is closer to the parishes, the seven archdeaconries become, effectively, the seven key areas of the diocese. The question follows, would you need an Episcopal Area as well? Isn’t this what the archdeaconries are doing, creating seven smaller more coherent and workable Areas, rather than three? And if, as we envisage, the seven archdeacons are now the key implementers of change – taking prime responsibility for pastoral reorganisation, the establishment of the ‘mission and ministry units’ that will be central to our future sustainability and mission, and, therefore appointments and review within the diocese – why would we need an Area Bishop as well? Indeed, it could be argued that keeping the Area Bishops in post in the same way as at the moment might actually compromise our plans, since the parishes may well look over the head of the Archdeacon for the Bishop’s view whenever something contentious arises. Ranging from ‘business as usual’ to the seven Archdeacons becoming seven Bishops in seven Episcopal Areas, there seemed to be several ways forward which were discussed extensively at our Bishop’s Council in May 2013 and Diocesan Synod on 15 June 2013. We also met with representatives of the Dioceses Commission in May 2013 to share our thinking and take on their suggestions. Out of all these deliberations the following way forward emerged: 1. We now see our seven archdeaconries as being the key places in which parishes and churches find their belonging, and it is in the archdeaconry that the missional change we long to see at every level of church life will be implemented. In due course we would like to test the mind of the Church as to whether this sort of leadership, pitched at this level of church life, would be better served by a Bishop than an Archdeacon. But this is for the future. In the medium term we want to bed down these new structures and see how they work. 2. Therefore we need to maintain our three Episcopal Areas and three Area Bishops for a time, but with a new emphasis to their ministry. This is reflected in the role descriptions later in this document, but in brief, we see the Bishops’ role to be: Leaders in mission – inspiring encouraging, enabling and resourcing mission and evangelism in the very different contexts across the diocese – engaging with the wider community in Essex and East London Being a praying heart within the diocese Vocations – fostering, discerning, supporting and encouraging Teaching the faith (working primarily with people rather than structures) The formation and development of clergy (and other licensed ministries) Outward facing towards the world – evangelism, public square etc. 2 The Diocesan Synod on 2 March 2013 endorsed the paper Reimagining Ministry, described further in the following section. Transforming Leadership and Reimagining Ministry did not review the complementary roles of the Chapter of Bishops in the Diocese and the implications for the current area system. However, the same priorities which shape Reimagining Ministry need to underpin a reimagined episcopal ministry: Mission Focus Improving Health and Well-being Increasing Collaboration and Team Working Strengthening Congregations Developing Licensed Ministry Recognising and celebrating the ministry of all Addressing the Availability of Stipendiary Clergy Bishops are therefore called to be leaders in mission, teachers and pastors with a special care for licensed ministers, and in the discernment and formation of new ministers. They are called to model the collaborative ministry and be a focus of unity for all in the diocese. The advantage of this approach – as was suggested by many who spoke in our Diocesan Synod – is that maintaining the arrangement of Area Bishops provides the continuity we need at a time of quite radical change, as well as being midwives to the potential new system, which needs to be evaluated more fully. This led, in 2014 to the Dioceses Commission agreeing our plans to appoint new Bishops of Barking and Colchester. This has proved to be the right conclusion, recognising the enormity of the change programme underway. Bishops Peter and Roger, alongside Bishop John before his illness, have been modelling the new pattern of working with their Archdeacon colleagues. However, it was not our plan to be considering the larger questions quite so soon. Following a long illness, The Rt Revd John Wraw, Bishop of Bradwell, died in Office on 25 July 2017. Notwithstanding our longer term proposals, we believe it is right to reappoint to Bradwell at this time. In view of the need for senior leadership capacity, and although we do envisage further change at a later date, it would be counterproductive for senior staff numbers to drop just at the time we have (through our own strategic and financial initiative) created a few more. A motion concerning filling the Bradwell Vacancy in See was presented to the Chelmsford Bishop’s Council in October 2017 and Diocesan Synod in November. We are now looking to the Dioceses Commission to support the appointment of a new Bishop of Bradwell. What follows is a more specific case for this post in the Diocese of Chelmsford and the ways in which we see episcopal ministry being exercised. All this is set in the wider context of our ministry strategy and our desire to keep on the